[Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289<draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Fri, 30 August 2002 02:03 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA18588 for <diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:03:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7U24Gl20362 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 22:04:16 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U1mNo19739; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:48:23 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7U1a5o18833 for <diffserv@optimus.ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:36:05 -0400
Received: from sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.163.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA17564 for <diffserv@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 21:34:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from FRED-W2K6.cisco.com (stealth-10-32-253-235.cisco.com [10.32.253.235]) by sj-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g7U1ZNKC004343; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020829183359.04bb0da0@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com>
X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:35:23 -0700
To: Kwok Ho Chan <khchan@NortelNetworks.com>
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Cc: ah_smith@acm.org, diffserv@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20020829194447.02514980@zbl6c002.corpeast.bayne tworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289<draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv>, <mailto:diffserv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List <diffserv.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:diffserv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:diffserv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv>, <mailto:diffserv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
At 07:45 PM 8/29/2002 -0400, Kwok Ho Chan wrote: >Fred: >Are you referring to the attached E-Mail? yes. I would like all comments edited into the new document to have at least been seen by the working group. I don't think we'll get a lot of commentary, but people should have the opportunity. >-- Kwok -- > >>From: "Andrew Smith" <ah_smith@acm.org> >>To: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian@hursley.ibm.com>, "Fred Baker" >><fred@cisco.com>, >> "Chan, Kwok-Ho [BL60:470:EXCH]"<khchan@americasm06.nt.com> >>Cc: <knichols@packetdesign.com>, <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, >> "Dan Grossman" <dan@dma.isg.mot.com> >>Subject: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC >>3289<draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >>Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:20:51 -0700 >>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) >>Importance: Normal >>X-SMTP-HELO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net >>X-SMTP-MAIL-FROM: ah_smith@acm.org >>X-SMTP-RCPT-TO: khchan@nortelnetworks.com >>X-SMTP-PEER-INFO: falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74] >> >>I just found out about the "48 hours" today: most of these comments are >>probably (way) too late but there are some editorial things buried in here >>that might be helpful at this late stage: >> >>Please change my contact info: >> OLD: >> >> A. Smith >> Allegro Networks >> NEW: >> A. Smith >> Harbour Networks >> >>11. Authors' Addresses >> >>OLD: >> Andrew Smith >> Allegro Networks >> 6399 San Ignacio Ave >> San Jose, CA 95119 >> >> EMail: andrew@allegronetworks.com >> NEW: >> Andrew Smith >> Harbour Networks >> Jiuling Building >> 21 North Xisanhuan Ave. >> Beijing, 100089, PRC >> >> EMail: ah_smith@acm.org >> >> >> >>3.5.3. diffServMinRateTable - The Minimum Rate Table: The description (both >>here and in the comments in the MIB module and in the DESCRIPTION clauses) >>is unclear on when the Rate and when the Priority parameters are to be used >>and what is their combined effect: >> >> "When the output rate of a queue or scheduler must be given a minimum >> rate or a priority, this is done using the diffServMinRateTable. >> Rates may be expressed as absolute rates, or as a fraction of >> ifSpeed, and imply the use of a rate-based scheduler such as WFQ or >> WRR. The use of a priority implies the use of a Priority Scheduler. >> Only one of the Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set; the other >> takes the relevant value as a result. Excess capacity is distributed >> proportionally among the inputs to a scheduler using the assured >> rate. More complex functionality may be described by augmenting this >> MIB." >> >>I thought that the type of scheduler was implied by diffServSchedulerMethod, >>not by "use of a priority". And if you're doing strict priority scheduling, >>neither of Absolute or Relative rates needs to be set, right? Text above >>seems to imply otherwise. See also below. >> >>3.5.5 There's no reference to figure 4. Perhaps it should be from the >>paragraph at the bottom of p18? >> >>3.5.5 Is there a way to keep this set of diagrams closer to (in-line with) >>the text describing them, or at least, on the same page? I know it wastes >>paper/bytes but would add to clarity. >> >>3.5.5 I find some of this relatively new text confusing (this is the first >>time I've seen it so tell me if I'm too late with the following comments). >>Specifically: >> >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, each scheduler input is >> assigned a priority with respect to all the other inputs feeding the >> same scheduler, with default values for the other parameters. >> Higher-priority traffic that is not being delayed for shaping will be >> serviced before a lower-priority input. An example is found in >> Figure 2." >> >>Clearer (or, at least, more accurate) is: >> >> "For representing a Strict Priority scheduler, the >>diffServSchedulerMethod is set to diffServSchedulerPriority and the >>prededing queue or scheduler feeding this scheduler input is assigned a >>priority in its associated diffServMinRateEntry with respect to all the >>other inputs feeding the same scheduler (the value of the other parameters >>in this entry are irrelevant). Traffic from higher-priority inputs to this >>scheduler will be serviced before that from lower-priority inputs. An >>example is found in Figure 2." >> >>Figures 3, 4 and 5: suggest you use more specific labels in some of the >>boxes to remove confusion: >>- figure 3, replace "Rate" with "MaxRate" in each box; >>- figure 4, put something in the empty boxes e.g. "n/a" or leave them out. >>Replace "Shaping Rate" with "MaxRate" - we have no parameter called shaping >>rate. >> >>3.5.5: suggest you lose the NOTE and its text, just above figure 4, or at >>least join it up with the following paragraph. >> >>3.5.5: last paragraph should be part of 3.6 really. And glue Figure 6 to >>this paragraph for clarity. >> >>3.6: change "four AF classes" to "four AF classes, each with 3 levels of >>drop precedence or 'colours'". We must be clear that this is just an example >>of an AF implementation that chooses to do 4 classes, each with 3 colours. >> >>3.6: Suggest you use the same example scenario for figures 6 and 7 - it's >>confusing to use different example scenarios. Figure 7 introduces a new kind >>of "hybrid" notation for the first time (we've always gone left-to-right >>before, not top-to-bottom - I preferred the former for clarity): I suggest >>it needs some words to explain the notation (rhetorical questions: what do >>the lines imply when they don't have arrowheads? what are the 2 or 3 >>different lines exiting from the meters? These are all deducible from the >>following text but it's made harder work due to the new notation. BTW, >>there's an arrow missing out of the back/bottom/right Action box. >> >>3.6: suggest you add the "everything else" case that you discuss in the text >>to figure 7. >> >>3.6.: there's no reference to figure 7 in the text. >> >>3.6 and 3.7: actually, I'm not sure why these sections are here in this >>document - a few years ago, we took out similar "tutorial" material and put >>it in the Model draft. There's nothing in these sections that is specific to >>the MIB. The right thing to have in this document is the "translation" of an >>example like this into the structures and linkages used by the MIB but these >>sections do not help with this. We had such material in draft-09 and it has >>disappeared (I'm not saying 3.6 and 3.7 aren't useful material but it just >>does not belong in this document) - I think this is a backward step. >> >>Anyhow, I'm probably too late to the party with most of these comments - I >>should have reviewed it when the IESG last call was in progress (I didn't >>realise so much had changed since -09 which was the last version that I >>reviewed properly). >> >>Andrew >> >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian@hursley.ibm.com] >>Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 5:56 AM >>To: Fred Baker >>Cc: knichols@packetdesign.com; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org; Andrew Smith; >>Kwok Ho Chan >>Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC >>3289<draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >> >> >>OK, in view of Kwok's response we can give it another day or say, but >>then... >> >> Brian >> >>Fred Baker wrote: >> > >> > You may need to make an executive decision here. Andrew and Kwok are AWOL. >> > >> > >Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 19:50:58 GMT >> > >To: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > <draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >> > >Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, >> > > bwijnen@lucent.com, fred@cisco.com >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, >> > > >> > >We still have not heard from you regarding this document. Please let >> > >us know if there are any corrections required. >> > > >> > >We are waiting to hear from you. >> > > >> > >RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > >----- Begin Included Message ----- >> > > >> > > >From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Thu May 23 16:22:59 2002 >> > >Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 23:22:45 GMT >> > >To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > >Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > <draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >> > >Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >>mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > >From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > >X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > >X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > >Content-Length: 3636 >> > > >> > >Kwok Ho and Andrew, >> > > >> > >Please let us know if the document is ready to be published. >> > > >> > >We are awaiting your reply. >> > > >> > >Thank you. >> > > >> > >RFC Editor >> > > >> > > >> > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Tue May 21 09:25:15 2002 >> > > > Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 16:24:54 GMT >> > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > <draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >>mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > Content-Length: 2866 >> > > > >> > > > Authors, >> > > > >> > > > We have not heard any further from you regarding this document. We >> > > > would appreciate a confirmation that the document is ready to be >> > > > published as it now appears at: >> > > > >> > > > ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/authors/rfc3289.txt >> > > > >> > > > We will wait to hear from you before continuing on. >> > > > >> > > > Thank you. >> > > > >> > > > RFC Editor >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > From rfc-ed@ISI.EDU Mon May 13 11:51:19 2002 >> > > > > Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:50:53 GMT >> > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, fred@cisco.com >> > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > > <draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >> > > mankin@ISI.EDU, >> > > > > sob@harvard.edu, bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > > From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > > X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII >> > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > > Content-Length: 1984 >> > > > > >> > > > > Fred, >> > > > > >> > > > > Thank you for bringing this to our attention. It now parses >> > > > > successfully. >> > > > > >> > > > > We have updated your contact information in the authors address >> > > > > section, as well as within the mib. >> > > > > >> > > > > Please let us know if there are any further corrections required. >>We >> > > > > will wait to hear from you. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thank you. >> > > > > >> > > > > RFC editor >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > From fred@cisco.com Fri May 10 01:03:56 2002 >> > > > > > X-Sender: fred@mira-sjcm-4.cisco.com >> > > > > > X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 >> > > > > > Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 16:03:24 +0800 >> > > > > > To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >> > > > > > From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> >> > > > > > Subject: Re: authors 48 hours: RFC 3289 >> > > > > > <draft-ietf-diffserv-mib-16.txt> NOW AVAILABLE >> > > > > > Cc: khchan@nortelnetworks.com, andrew@allegronetworks.com, >> > > > > > rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, mankin@ISI.EDU, sob@harvard.edu, >> > > > > > bwijnen@lucent.com >> > > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 >> > > > > > X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1 >> > > > > > >> > > > > > At 10:37 PM 5/9/2002 +0000, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org wrote: >> > > > > > >FYI: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (42,1) Textual convention "Dscp" defined but >> > > not used >> > > > > > >W: f(rfc3289.mi2), (52,1) Textual convention "DscpOrAny" defined >>but >> > > > > > >not used >> > > > > > >> > > > > > these two warnings come up because the TCs are in a separate MIB >> > > Module >> > > > > > from the main mib, and are imported into it. They are fine. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > My contact information has changed slightly; I have a new physical >> > > address. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>/=====================================================================/ >> > > > > > | Fred Baker | 1121 Via Del Rey >>| >> > > > > > | Cisco Fellow | Santa Barbara, >>California | >> > > > > > +--------------------------------+ 93117 USA >>| >> > > > > > | Nothing will ever be attempted,| phone: +1-805-681-0115 >>| >> > > > > > | if all possible objections must| fax: +1-413-473-2403 >>| >> > > > > > | be first overcome. | >>| >> > > > > > | Dr. Johnson, Rasselas, 1759| >>| >> > > > > > >>/=====================================================================/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > >----- End Included Message ----- > _______________________________________________ diffserv mailing list diffserv@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html
- [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 hours… Fred Baker
- RE: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 h… Andrew Smith
- Re: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 h… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 h… Dan Grossman
- RE: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 h… Fred Baker
- Re: [Diffserv] Re: Fwd: RE: Fwd: Re: authors 48 h… Brian E Carpenter